Everybody knows the history of race relations in America. First came slavery, then jim crow and the KKK, finally the civil rights movement brought our country out of its hatred and hypocrisy and into the modern era. However the transition from racism to equality was not a smooth or particularly quick one. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 effectively made it illegal to discriminate against anyone based on their race, religion, or ethnic background. However implementation of this decision through school desegregation and the creation of fair employment and housing practices was still a long way off. However these are the issues that everyone always focuses on. What about the rest of the story?
Interestingly enough, it wasn't until 1967 in the landmark supreme court case Loving v. Virgina that it was officially unconstitutional to have laws banning interracial marriage. Racist attitudes about mixed couples continued throughout the 70's and 80's. It wasn't until arguably the 1990's that interracial marriages were looked upon favorably by a majority of Americans, as in able to be made legal through a popular vote and not a court ruling. Remember that because it is important. Although public opinion of interracial marriages has continued to improve, there are still those in 2009 who frown upon such unions.
Enter political correctness. About the time that the civil rights movement started, the term African American became popular. It certainly is much better than "darkie", "boy" or "nigga". But equality was still a long way off. After the civil rights act it was illegal to discriminate based upon race. It would soon become socially taboo and politically incorrect to refer to a person of color as a nigga, (something I wish continued to this day among members of the Black community). But if I were alive back then, would it have made much difference? Say I wanted to marry a white woman after the 1964 non-discrimination laws were passed. I would still have to wait three years depending on what state we lived in because there were still laws on the books actually telling me who I was and was not allowed to marry. Sounds ridiculous right? Keep that in mind too, it's also important.
Realistically speaking her family probably wouldn't have been too thrilled at the idea. Mine probably would have either, not like I would have cared one iota what other people think. What might my new father-in-law have said to me on our wedding night? "Well your not a nigga... but I still don't think you're good enough for my daughter." Ouch, I think I'd rather you just cut the act and call me a nigga anyway. Its obvious you want to if you are still making all the same judgments and holding all the same racist worldviews that lead you to look upon me negatively in the first place. So what good is political correctness in the face of obvious disdain and hatred? In this scenario, does being politically correct about telling me who you think I'm good enough for based upon erroneous and false stereotypes and prejudiced and archaic world views actually make your position ok? Am I supposed to leave that confrontation with warm fuzzies because I'm not a nigga, I'm just another lazy black guy who isn't good enough for your white daughter?
Fast forward to 2009 and suddenly everything is different. I am on a wonderful campus surrounded by beautiful women everywhere. I can choose freely who I associate with and who I date, without fear of violence or social disapproval and reprisal. Which is a good thing, seeing as how the campus I'm on is over 50% women and 80% White. Now I'm not the best at math but I think those numbers mean that the vast majority of women that I interact with on campus won't look like I do. I'm fine with that. Most other people are fine with that. Thank God we have come a long way since 1967. So basically I'm cool and don't have a care in the world. What a selfish view to have! Any inequality anywhere is an injustice to all. So this brings up the question, "what about the gays?"
Yesterday had the potential to be a landmark election in American history. No Barack Obama is not up for reelection already, it was something much deeper than just one man or one political office up for grabs. The state of Maine was voting on whether or not to uphold a law that was passed earlier in the year that gave gay couples the right to marry. Things looked promising at first. Early returns from the heavily Democratic cities and towns showed that the law was going to be upheld. Then the results from the Republican leaning areas of the state came in and it was all over. In a 53% to 47% vote, Maine rejected the idea of equality for all of its citizens, following in the footsteps of every other public vote and referendum on gay marriage that this country has ever had.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1934432,00.html?iid=tsmodule
Recall what I told you to remember. It wasn't until the late 1990's that interracial marriage was popular enough to win a popular vote in an election. That election never happened because of Loving v Virginia. It looks like gay marriage might not be so lucky. Again consider political correctness and the wonderful lip service it gives to minorities in this country. Recently several prominent figures, politicians, entertainers, and athletes, have gotten in serious trouble for making comments that are insensitive to gay people. Most recently a NFL player was suspended and fined after he insulted his coach by calling him a fag after a particularly upsetting loss. Its wonderful that it is socially unacceptable to use words that are offensive to gays and lesbians, as it should be. But going back to the nigga example, what does it really matter if there is no true equality?
Opponents of gay marriage in Maine used the same tired line that won in California, "we're doing it for the children". They insisted that is the law was upheld that gay marriage would be taught in schools, which is false. And even if it was, what harm could that do. Republicans act like being gay is a disease like the h1n1. They see homosexuality as contagious, like being around a gay person will somehow turn the rest of us gay, also false. These hate and scare tactics are wrong. But they work. They worked for proposition 8 in California and they worked last night in what is arguably the most liberal state in the country. That is what probably hurts the most for gay rights activists. This was a golden opportunity for them to make great strides towards finally achieving equality. America once again showed it is not yet ready to live up to the lofty words in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal" and that "everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Isn't the world lonely enough without restricting relationships between loving and consenting adults even further. I've been out on my own for a while now and I know that the world is a lonely place. The last thing I would tolerate is someone else telling me who and when and how I could get married. Quite frankly its none of their business!
American hypocrisy is astounding. Not only do we as a nation fail to live up to our own promises of freedom and equality, but politicians aren't helping matters either. The same "family values champions" are the same ones who illegally use tax-payer money to galavant down to Argentina to cheat on your wife with this other random woman. Oh and your two little boys are watching how you treat your wife and how humiliated she is in front of the whole country. Thats a great way to protect the sanctity of marriage Mark Sanford, former governor of South Carolina. Or how about Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards? His wife has cancer and is fighting for her life running in and out of hospitals to get chemotherapy while trying to be there for her husband and his political career. How does he repay her? Does he stay loyal and faithful to her like any man with even the slightest hint of integrity would? Nope. He cheats on his dying wife with a younger woman and then tries to make up for it by apologizing to the American public. I'm not the one he should be apologizing to, he should apologize to God and his wife. Those are the people he hurt and let down, not me.
This whole argument that legalizing gay marriage somehow weakens or cheapens the institution is bogus. America's divorce rate is through the ceiling as it is and Gay marriage is not legal. Maybe if people spent more time worrying about their own marriages and not what gay couples were doing then being a divorce lawyer wouldn't be such a lucrative business option. As a future lawyer I have already decided that I will never practice divorce law. I want no part in destroying what people swore before God and man was an eternal bond. I know the pain that comes from broken families. I won't help other people perpetuate the pain that I went through. As for the institution of marriage, its all a matter of personal choice. I'm a straight Black man that can support gay marriage with a clear conscience and still believe in the role of the traditional family. I want to be with one woman and one woman only, for life. Me supporting equality for all people in know way changes my view that marriage is a wonderful gift that should be protected and cherished for as long as both shall live. Until I meet the right woman for me I'll keep searching. But I won't settle for anything less than the one. Just like America shouldn't settle for anything less than total and complete equality.
I am sure that the vote last night in Maine was only the beginning. The fight will continue until full rights are one for gay couples. Until that day comes don't give lip service with all of this political correct bull. Remember, even if you don't call me a nigga but you still look at me and treat me like I'm one, then we really have made no progress at all.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Better off not being a woman.
Apparently I was very sheltered as a kid. I truly believed that we lived in a world where good was the overwhelmingly normal outcome and that evil was an outlier of human behavior. Maybe all of those Disney movies where good always triumphs over evil went to my head. Or maybe it is just in my nature to always try and see the positive in any situation, no matter how messed up things may be. I'm not turning into a cynic, not yet anyways, but when I come across news stories like this one, it's hard to swallow, impossible to rationalize, too horrible to comprehend.
Domestic violence has always been one of my few unforgivable sins. Whether it's the hopeless romantic in me that just can't fathom acts of violence against women or the fact that several people close to me that I love deeply have been the victims of men who talk with their fists and not their mouths, it has always been an issue that struck me at my core. Seeing the personal side from the eyes of the victim is truly heart-wrenching. Seeing from the eyes of politics or cowardly bystanders is maddening. But that is exactly what happened in these two news stories.
The first article is about the changing role of women in Saudi Arabia. Thankfully the majority of the article is positive. It details the progress that Saudi Arabia has made in incorporating women into the workplace. Much of this progress is thanks to the ruler of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah, and his decision to replace conservative Islamic hardliners with clerics who will emphasize the tolerance of Islam, something that radicals like the Taliban in other countries conveniently choose to ignore. Women are finally attending univeristies and gaining employment as educated professionals, working alongside men in important fields like government, law and medicine.
Many Saudi men are unused to these changes. Saudi culture is still very misogynistic despite all of the wonderful gains they have made towards equality in the last couple of years. It is still against the law for women to drive cars, or to even leave the house without the permission of a male member of the family. Those that do could face harsh punishment. King Abdullah appointed his daughter, Princess Adelah, to spearhead the effort against domestic violence. They succeeded in passing legislation that made it illegal for husbands to beat their children and wives. My question is, what kind of society needs to have these kinds of laws passed in the 21st century? The royal family actually sponsored PR campaigns encouraging husbands to "satisfy their wives emotionally and to protect their marriage". Isn't that common sense? I honestly didn't think that people had to be told to cherish the one that they pledge to spend the rest of their life with. But this is a culture that for the longest time has had absolutely archaic views towards women, placing them on the level of human property if not worse. It was normal for Saudi husbands to beat their wives for any kind of offence, real or imaginary. Even something as simple as spending too much money at the market could lead to a socially sanctioned one sided boxing match. The American equivalent would be Jimmy giving his wife Karen a black eye because she just couldn't say no to the 30% off sale at Kohls. Up until recently no one would have batted an eye had such events transpired in the Kingdom. Fortunately all of that is changing and domestic violence is becoming socially unacceptable, like it should have been all along. Women in Saudi Arabia have a long way to go, but it is promising that the country is taking steps in the right direction.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091010/wl_time/09171192915200
Before we as Americans get on our high moral horse and proclaim that inequality and abuse are problems in other cultures but not our own, we should take a look at another story from California. Very rarely do I find myself at a loss for words, but this time I really didn't know what to say. All I know is that before I read the news article I was having a good day, afterwards, I was sad, angry, and questioning the very nature of humanity itself. We all remember high school. For some it was good, for some it was bad. But the bad very rarely get this bad. Like nearly everyone else in America I went to homecoming and prom. My worst fears were embarassing myself in front of my date on the dance floor or spilling something on myself at dinner. I'm notorius among my friends for being clumsy. For my parents, their worst fear was that I would miss curfew and be too tired for church the next mroning, (or maybe that us kids might sneak off to a party or somewhere else for some extra fun, they never really told me). But no teenager or parent would expect what happened recently at California's Richmond High School.
Saturday night, while a homecoming dance was taking place at the school, a fifteen year old girl was gang raped and beaten by as many as ten guys. For over two hours she was molested in the school courtyard, while police officers and school faculty were watching over the rest of the students at the dance that was taking place in the school gym.
Details are fuzzy as to how the incident started. Thankfully the girl is now out of the hospital and is at home making a full recovery. Or at least as much of a recovery as is possible from such a traumatic event. This raises three questions, the first two of which are obvious, how did this happen and what steps were taken to prevent it? Apparently the student was for some reason separated from the rest and attacked by this group of guys, who range in age from 16 on up. So far only 6 of the suspected ten have been arrested. I can only hope that the rest are caught as well and sentenced to the maximum prison sentence that the law allows for that crime. As far as preventive measures, the school knew that only 7 of their 16 security cameras actually worked. They had lobbied for years to get additional lighting, cameras and security fences. Some of this equipment was supposed to have been installed over last summer. It was not, and now an innocent girl has paid the price for the district's cost cutting measures.
Obviously there is something wrong and evil about the men who attacked her. There is no question there. I hope they get everything they deserve and more for such a heinous and cowardly crime. But the saddest part of this ordeal hasn't even been mentioned yet. Not only was the girl attacked by the gang, but there were several bystanders who watched the attack. They made no move to help or intervene in any way. No 911 calls were reported for this incident. She was found naked from the waist down and barely conscious sometime the next day. The police estimate that as many as 20 unknown people stood by while this girl fought for her life against a bunch of thugs and criminals. How do they know there were bystanders? Because these perverts took pictures of the rape with their cell phone cameras. Nice to know that we as Americans don't call for help when someone is in trouble, we sit by and watch and use technology to document the event for future recollection. There really isn't much left to say. Everything is just as bad as it sounds, no exaggerations or emotional pitches needed. Whoever watched this brutal attack and did nothing to stop it are just as guilty as the thugs who actively participated. My heart and prayers go out to the girl and her family.
http://www.usatoday.com/NEWS/usaedition/2009-11-03-column03_ST1_U.htm?csp=34
All of this leaves me thinking that this world is messed up beyond repair. If we live in a place where such atrocities are possible then what else is left to say? My sister turns eleven in less than a week. As she matures into a young woman is this the kind of thing I have to worry about happening to her. After all the girl at that homecoming dance was only four years older than her. Still a child, yet these guys, (I refuse to call such cowards men) used her for their own sick pleasures and fantasies. What if it had been their daughter or signifigant other that was attacked? Would they even care? Apprently not if they are willing to treat someone else's loved one so cruelly. I know if I had gotten the phone call and she was related to me then someone would have hell to pay. At what point is enough truly enough? What does one do when the world seems to have lost its mind and there is nothing you can do about it accept read about it and slowly become more and more depressed and angry? I know one thing is for sure, it is time for all the real men to stand up and put a stop to this nonsense. Until that happens, you're probably better off not being a woman.
Domestic violence has always been one of my few unforgivable sins. Whether it's the hopeless romantic in me that just can't fathom acts of violence against women or the fact that several people close to me that I love deeply have been the victims of men who talk with their fists and not their mouths, it has always been an issue that struck me at my core. Seeing the personal side from the eyes of the victim is truly heart-wrenching. Seeing from the eyes of politics or cowardly bystanders is maddening. But that is exactly what happened in these two news stories.
The first article is about the changing role of women in Saudi Arabia. Thankfully the majority of the article is positive. It details the progress that Saudi Arabia has made in incorporating women into the workplace. Much of this progress is thanks to the ruler of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah, and his decision to replace conservative Islamic hardliners with clerics who will emphasize the tolerance of Islam, something that radicals like the Taliban in other countries conveniently choose to ignore. Women are finally attending univeristies and gaining employment as educated professionals, working alongside men in important fields like government, law and medicine.
Many Saudi men are unused to these changes. Saudi culture is still very misogynistic despite all of the wonderful gains they have made towards equality in the last couple of years. It is still against the law for women to drive cars, or to even leave the house without the permission of a male member of the family. Those that do could face harsh punishment. King Abdullah appointed his daughter, Princess Adelah, to spearhead the effort against domestic violence. They succeeded in passing legislation that made it illegal for husbands to beat their children and wives. My question is, what kind of society needs to have these kinds of laws passed in the 21st century? The royal family actually sponsored PR campaigns encouraging husbands to "satisfy their wives emotionally and to protect their marriage". Isn't that common sense? I honestly didn't think that people had to be told to cherish the one that they pledge to spend the rest of their life with. But this is a culture that for the longest time has had absolutely archaic views towards women, placing them on the level of human property if not worse. It was normal for Saudi husbands to beat their wives for any kind of offence, real or imaginary. Even something as simple as spending too much money at the market could lead to a socially sanctioned one sided boxing match. The American equivalent would be Jimmy giving his wife Karen a black eye because she just couldn't say no to the 30% off sale at Kohls. Up until recently no one would have batted an eye had such events transpired in the Kingdom. Fortunately all of that is changing and domestic violence is becoming socially unacceptable, like it should have been all along. Women in Saudi Arabia have a long way to go, but it is promising that the country is taking steps in the right direction.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091010/wl_time/09171192915200
Before we as Americans get on our high moral horse and proclaim that inequality and abuse are problems in other cultures but not our own, we should take a look at another story from California. Very rarely do I find myself at a loss for words, but this time I really didn't know what to say. All I know is that before I read the news article I was having a good day, afterwards, I was sad, angry, and questioning the very nature of humanity itself. We all remember high school. For some it was good, for some it was bad. But the bad very rarely get this bad. Like nearly everyone else in America I went to homecoming and prom. My worst fears were embarassing myself in front of my date on the dance floor or spilling something on myself at dinner. I'm notorius among my friends for being clumsy. For my parents, their worst fear was that I would miss curfew and be too tired for church the next mroning, (or maybe that us kids might sneak off to a party or somewhere else for some extra fun, they never really told me). But no teenager or parent would expect what happened recently at California's Richmond High School.
Saturday night, while a homecoming dance was taking place at the school, a fifteen year old girl was gang raped and beaten by as many as ten guys. For over two hours she was molested in the school courtyard, while police officers and school faculty were watching over the rest of the students at the dance that was taking place in the school gym.
Details are fuzzy as to how the incident started. Thankfully the girl is now out of the hospital and is at home making a full recovery. Or at least as much of a recovery as is possible from such a traumatic event. This raises three questions, the first two of which are obvious, how did this happen and what steps were taken to prevent it? Apparently the student was for some reason separated from the rest and attacked by this group of guys, who range in age from 16 on up. So far only 6 of the suspected ten have been arrested. I can only hope that the rest are caught as well and sentenced to the maximum prison sentence that the law allows for that crime. As far as preventive measures, the school knew that only 7 of their 16 security cameras actually worked. They had lobbied for years to get additional lighting, cameras and security fences. Some of this equipment was supposed to have been installed over last summer. It was not, and now an innocent girl has paid the price for the district's cost cutting measures.
Obviously there is something wrong and evil about the men who attacked her. There is no question there. I hope they get everything they deserve and more for such a heinous and cowardly crime. But the saddest part of this ordeal hasn't even been mentioned yet. Not only was the girl attacked by the gang, but there were several bystanders who watched the attack. They made no move to help or intervene in any way. No 911 calls were reported for this incident. She was found naked from the waist down and barely conscious sometime the next day. The police estimate that as many as 20 unknown people stood by while this girl fought for her life against a bunch of thugs and criminals. How do they know there were bystanders? Because these perverts took pictures of the rape with their cell phone cameras. Nice to know that we as Americans don't call for help when someone is in trouble, we sit by and watch and use technology to document the event for future recollection. There really isn't much left to say. Everything is just as bad as it sounds, no exaggerations or emotional pitches needed. Whoever watched this brutal attack and did nothing to stop it are just as guilty as the thugs who actively participated. My heart and prayers go out to the girl and her family.
http://www.usatoday.com/NEWS/usaedition/2009-11-03-column03_ST1_U.htm?csp=34
All of this leaves me thinking that this world is messed up beyond repair. If we live in a place where such atrocities are possible then what else is left to say? My sister turns eleven in less than a week. As she matures into a young woman is this the kind of thing I have to worry about happening to her. After all the girl at that homecoming dance was only four years older than her. Still a child, yet these guys, (I refuse to call such cowards men) used her for their own sick pleasures and fantasies. What if it had been their daughter or signifigant other that was attacked? Would they even care? Apprently not if they are willing to treat someone else's loved one so cruelly. I know if I had gotten the phone call and she was related to me then someone would have hell to pay. At what point is enough truly enough? What does one do when the world seems to have lost its mind and there is nothing you can do about it accept read about it and slowly become more and more depressed and angry? I know one thing is for sure, it is time for all the real men to stand up and put a stop to this nonsense. Until that happens, you're probably better off not being a woman.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Interracial Relationships and the Myth of Post Racial America
It really is amazing how life works out. Sometimes I don't understand why certain things happen in my life. Often times events are seemingly random and completely unconnected. But at other times everything falls into place like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle.
So a couple of days ago I'm on my way to class when I run into a beautiful woman who is an old friend from high school. We stop and chat for a while about life, how the quarter is going, just basically catching up on everything that has happened since the three years we've seen each other. I'm having a great time and am running the risk of being late, not that that was high on my priority list at the time. So just when I'm about to ask for her number she drops the bombshell, she already has a boyfriend. Now before you ask, no this isn't some personal sob story about my love life or the lack thereof. I went on about my day still happy we had a chance to talk and rather nostalgic about my recent social past. It never once occurred to me that the fact that she is White might alarm some people.
Fast forward two days and I'm browsing the web at work when I come across two interesting articles. The first involves an interracial couple that was denied a marriage license in Louisianna. My first reaction was shock, I thought maybe it wasn't recent, like a fluffy historical news interest article about life in the 1950's. Then I looked at the date and realized that this was recent, as in 2009! Then the anger set in. I'm really passionate about justice and equality for all people, I'm also a hopeless romantic, so the idea of someone telling someone else who they can or can't marry based upon a reason as stupid as skin color is mortifying to me. I read a little bit of the article and was surprised to find that the jugde OPENLY ADMITTED that the reason he denied their request was because they were an interracial couple. At this point, I was confused. People who are racists and bigots very rarely openly admit to a point like this. Most people try to hide behind rational like "I'm not racist because I have Black friends" or "I didn't mean to offend anybody, those are just my beliefs". Once caught, bigots often offer a weak apology to placate the media and then go right back to business as usual. However this case seemed a little different.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091016/ap_on_re_us/us_interracial_rebuff
The rational behind the judge's decision was interesting to say the least. To summarize the article he basically said that based on his past experience, the children of interacial marriages are not accepted by either ethnic group and are therefore socially maligned and ostracized. He contends that this causes extreme harm to the child and that he wants no part in creating such a painful situation. For this reason he has denied every interracial marriage request he has recieved, which is a grand total of 4. The judge goes on to say that he treats everyone the same, marries Black couples in his home and "lets them use his bathroom" so therefore he is not racist. The couple currently in question has vowed to fight this matter in court with the help of the American Civil Liverties Union.
There are several interesting questions involiving race relations and legal conscience that can be raised from this scenario. However, I only want to focus on one in particular, is the judge right about the kids? Obviously what the judge did is against the law. It is illegal to discriminate against anyone based upon their skin color. But the judge raises an interesting point. Are interracial relationships and their offspring still socially unacceptable in America? I know historically speaking they certainly were at one point. If they still are then that would be a huge blow to this whole wave of euphoria about America being a post-racial nation since we finally elected a Black president as the commander in chief. Unfortunately the article about the judge offers no survey data about people's attitudes towards cross-race love. But my attention was grabbed by a link to a related article on politico.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28175.html
This article is about a man who is currently running for political office in New York. He is a White man who is married to a Black woman and is one of the first politicians to ever use images of an interracial family as a positive in campaign politics. He has two beautiful children who campaign with him and pose for photos. This is an uplifting story about a genuine guy that isnt ashamed of who he is or who his family is. By all accounts, political pundits and analysts have concluded that his campaign strategy, designed to give him credibility among Black voters and to portray the image of solidarity, worked very well. He recently won the Democratic primary run off election and is now preparing for the next phase of the campaign. The article continues with glowing interviews from the family and from analysts who all describe this as an example of the wonderful effect that Obama has had on the social and moral fiber of America.
Then reality sets in. It seems that as long as it's a White man marrying a Black Woman or a White person interested in someone of the opposite gender who is Asian or Hispanic or Native American then there is no problem. Black people can usually marry anyone they want too, actually it seems like everyone can, as long as you aren't a Black man that wants a White woman that is. The article goes on to note that the political history of interracial relationships has not always been so pleasant. They reference a 2006 Senate race in Tennessee where the Black incumbent was beaten by the Republican challenger after the Republican National Commitee ran adds tying the Black man to a scantily clad White woman who was several years his junior. Small wonder he only lost the election. 40 Years ago it would have been his life. And yes the this is the same Republican National Committee that currently has a token Black guy, Michael Steele, as its chairman to try and nullify Obama's hold on the minority electorate vote. Maybe if he would stop trying to be hip and actually condemn racist practices like that 2006 campaign add then I would buy into the charade a little more.
Make no mistake, this is all intentional. The political strategists knew that stoking racial fears would win them that Senate seat. They also knew that it was wrong but they did it anyway. Since slavery, Americans have had an incredibly powerful and equally stupid belief that Black men were here to harm "their" White women. It was one of the justifications for slavery that Black men were animals that need to be controlled for the good of society. Slave rebellions would somehow mean that White women would be terrorized and victimized by the brute, by the animal, by the other. Nevermind the fact that it was actually White men who were married to White women who were the ones raping Black slaves and forcing them to carry and deliver their illigitimate children. After the emancipation proclomation there was no mass rape of White women. White Union soldiers did more damage economically and socially to the South then the freed slaves. But their irrational and racist fears persisted, some even till this day. Emmit Till was a 14 year old kid who was murdered and thrown in a river because he allegedly whistled at a White woman. This was one of the pivotal events that helped to spark the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's. I wonder what these same people would say 50 years later if they saw me chatting with my friend on the bus.
Irrational fears and bigotry were enough to derail the politcal career of an otherwise successful legislator. Race relations and politics continue to interact in unfortunately negative and predictable ways. Don't get me wrong, we have made large strides as a nation. The second article cites a Gallup study that put public support for interracial relationships in 1994 at 48%. In 13 years that number has risen to 77% by 2009. Also please note that this is not just a White phenonmenon. There are plenty of bigoted Blacks as well who can't get past their own prejudice to accept an interracial relationship. I actually wrote a whole post on this a few months back. Regardless of what color or etnic group you are, you should be able to find love and enjoy it without some racist nutjob condemning the union. Until the number from the Gallup poll is at 100% approval (with people not lying on the survey), America still has work to do. It is sad that I can have the best of intentions and the purest of motives and still be frowned upon for who I choose to socialize and interact with. Things didn't work out with my friend, but if they had I wonder how long it would be before we too were the victim of irrational fears and prejudice.
So a couple of days ago I'm on my way to class when I run into a beautiful woman who is an old friend from high school. We stop and chat for a while about life, how the quarter is going, just basically catching up on everything that has happened since the three years we've seen each other. I'm having a great time and am running the risk of being late, not that that was high on my priority list at the time. So just when I'm about to ask for her number she drops the bombshell, she already has a boyfriend. Now before you ask, no this isn't some personal sob story about my love life or the lack thereof. I went on about my day still happy we had a chance to talk and rather nostalgic about my recent social past. It never once occurred to me that the fact that she is White might alarm some people.
Fast forward two days and I'm browsing the web at work when I come across two interesting articles. The first involves an interracial couple that was denied a marriage license in Louisianna. My first reaction was shock, I thought maybe it wasn't recent, like a fluffy historical news interest article about life in the 1950's. Then I looked at the date and realized that this was recent, as in 2009! Then the anger set in. I'm really passionate about justice and equality for all people, I'm also a hopeless romantic, so the idea of someone telling someone else who they can or can't marry based upon a reason as stupid as skin color is mortifying to me. I read a little bit of the article and was surprised to find that the jugde OPENLY ADMITTED that the reason he denied their request was because they were an interracial couple. At this point, I was confused. People who are racists and bigots very rarely openly admit to a point like this. Most people try to hide behind rational like "I'm not racist because I have Black friends" or "I didn't mean to offend anybody, those are just my beliefs". Once caught, bigots often offer a weak apology to placate the media and then go right back to business as usual. However this case seemed a little different.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091016/ap_on_re_us/us_interracial_rebuff
The rational behind the judge's decision was interesting to say the least. To summarize the article he basically said that based on his past experience, the children of interacial marriages are not accepted by either ethnic group and are therefore socially maligned and ostracized. He contends that this causes extreme harm to the child and that he wants no part in creating such a painful situation. For this reason he has denied every interracial marriage request he has recieved, which is a grand total of 4. The judge goes on to say that he treats everyone the same, marries Black couples in his home and "lets them use his bathroom" so therefore he is not racist. The couple currently in question has vowed to fight this matter in court with the help of the American Civil Liverties Union.
There are several interesting questions involiving race relations and legal conscience that can be raised from this scenario. However, I only want to focus on one in particular, is the judge right about the kids? Obviously what the judge did is against the law. It is illegal to discriminate against anyone based upon their skin color. But the judge raises an interesting point. Are interracial relationships and their offspring still socially unacceptable in America? I know historically speaking they certainly were at one point. If they still are then that would be a huge blow to this whole wave of euphoria about America being a post-racial nation since we finally elected a Black president as the commander in chief. Unfortunately the article about the judge offers no survey data about people's attitudes towards cross-race love. But my attention was grabbed by a link to a related article on politico.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28175.html
This article is about a man who is currently running for political office in New York. He is a White man who is married to a Black woman and is one of the first politicians to ever use images of an interracial family as a positive in campaign politics. He has two beautiful children who campaign with him and pose for photos. This is an uplifting story about a genuine guy that isnt ashamed of who he is or who his family is. By all accounts, political pundits and analysts have concluded that his campaign strategy, designed to give him credibility among Black voters and to portray the image of solidarity, worked very well. He recently won the Democratic primary run off election and is now preparing for the next phase of the campaign. The article continues with glowing interviews from the family and from analysts who all describe this as an example of the wonderful effect that Obama has had on the social and moral fiber of America.
Then reality sets in. It seems that as long as it's a White man marrying a Black Woman or a White person interested in someone of the opposite gender who is Asian or Hispanic or Native American then there is no problem. Black people can usually marry anyone they want too, actually it seems like everyone can, as long as you aren't a Black man that wants a White woman that is. The article goes on to note that the political history of interracial relationships has not always been so pleasant. They reference a 2006 Senate race in Tennessee where the Black incumbent was beaten by the Republican challenger after the Republican National Commitee ran adds tying the Black man to a scantily clad White woman who was several years his junior. Small wonder he only lost the election. 40 Years ago it would have been his life. And yes the this is the same Republican National Committee that currently has a token Black guy, Michael Steele, as its chairman to try and nullify Obama's hold on the minority electorate vote. Maybe if he would stop trying to be hip and actually condemn racist practices like that 2006 campaign add then I would buy into the charade a little more.
Make no mistake, this is all intentional. The political strategists knew that stoking racial fears would win them that Senate seat. They also knew that it was wrong but they did it anyway. Since slavery, Americans have had an incredibly powerful and equally stupid belief that Black men were here to harm "their" White women. It was one of the justifications for slavery that Black men were animals that need to be controlled for the good of society. Slave rebellions would somehow mean that White women would be terrorized and victimized by the brute, by the animal, by the other. Nevermind the fact that it was actually White men who were married to White women who were the ones raping Black slaves and forcing them to carry and deliver their illigitimate children. After the emancipation proclomation there was no mass rape of White women. White Union soldiers did more damage economically and socially to the South then the freed slaves. But their irrational and racist fears persisted, some even till this day. Emmit Till was a 14 year old kid who was murdered and thrown in a river because he allegedly whistled at a White woman. This was one of the pivotal events that helped to spark the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's. I wonder what these same people would say 50 years later if they saw me chatting with my friend on the bus.
Irrational fears and bigotry were enough to derail the politcal career of an otherwise successful legislator. Race relations and politics continue to interact in unfortunately negative and predictable ways. Don't get me wrong, we have made large strides as a nation. The second article cites a Gallup study that put public support for interracial relationships in 1994 at 48%. In 13 years that number has risen to 77% by 2009. Also please note that this is not just a White phenonmenon. There are plenty of bigoted Blacks as well who can't get past their own prejudice to accept an interracial relationship. I actually wrote a whole post on this a few months back. Regardless of what color or etnic group you are, you should be able to find love and enjoy it without some racist nutjob condemning the union. Until the number from the Gallup poll is at 100% approval (with people not lying on the survey), America still has work to do. It is sad that I can have the best of intentions and the purest of motives and still be frowned upon for who I choose to socialize and interact with. Things didn't work out with my friend, but if they had I wonder how long it would be before we too were the victim of irrational fears and prejudice.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Staying the Course

Obama faces a critical decision in regards to Afghanistan and American foreign policy. We invaded Afghanistan in 2002 in response to the terrorist attacks by AL-Qaeda on September 11th. Since then the people of Afghanistan have suffered terribly. Their already poor country was shattered by political infighting and civil war as the new government headed by Karzai attempted to stave off threats from the deposed Taliban. Since the war began, thousands of innocent civilians have died in Nato bombing raids, Taliban reprisals, terrorists attacks, and the like. Sadly enough, this suffering civilian population is all too familiar with being in such a precarious situation.
Historically speaking, none of this is new. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan towards the end of the Cold War, America ran covert operations to supply weapons and supplies to the mujahadeen fighters who were conveniently killing our enemies for us. Using the maxim that the enemy of our enemy is our friend, we supplied weapons to Osama Bin Laden and his supporters who were successful in driving out the Soviet invaders. Much like the deceit and deviousness that America is so good at, the covert weapons that we supplied allowed them to win the war. However the problem doesn't come from the weapons supplies. The problem is that as soon as the war was over, we went home. We gave no money to rebuild homes and schools that had been destroyed in the fighting. Hospitals and other peices of infrastucture that are necessary to run a modern country were left devastated by the Soviet occupation. We sent a clear message to the Afghan citizens; that they were nothing more than pawns in a global game chess being played out by the two superpowers. However this game didn't involve wooden or marble peices, but the flesh and blood of human beings who paid the ultimate price while unwittingly fighting the enemies of America for us.
The right thing to do in any sich case would be to give aid when it was necessary, no matter what war or parties caused the devastation. However because our direct and secret involvement escalated the conflict and multiplied the devastation, it became a moral imperative for America to help Afgahnistan rebuild. Instead we ignored the problem and did nothing.
The power vacuum left by the Soviets and Americans was filled by the only locals with guns the Taliban.Ironically, we are the ones that supplied them with the weapons that they would later use against us in the name of Allah. Put simply, had we not been cowards in the 1980's and ran home to ignore the problem, we wouldnt be fighting a war in Afghanistan today. Don't believe me? Run a quick counterfactual scenario. Suppose America ahd been responsible in 1980 and worked to fix a problem we helped create. Had America funded schools, hospitals and other necessary projects to acheieve an acceptable standard of living, then the people would be eternally grateful. All of the hate filled rhetoric of the Taliban about how the west is evil and immoral would have never taken hold because they would owe us for rebuilding their newly liberated country. It is quite conceivable that a pro-America democracy could have been established as early as the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1989. The last 20 years then would have been filled with peace and prosperity for Afghanistan, instead of suffering under the oppressive Taliban who kill all who oppose them, civilian or otherwise. What kind of people kill thier own just to stay in power?
Unfortunately America didn't do the right thing twenty years ago. What's worse is that there is now political pressure from the left for Obama to not escalate the war in Afghanistan. They keep calling for the troops to come home. They argue that the real war is no longer in Afghanistan but is in Pakistan, where the majority of the terrorists have fled. Obama's generals are arguing for more troops. They know the fight can be won if we perserver. The generals are not caught up in all the politics and appeasement that corrupt Washington and make America do the things we know to be wrong. Politically speaking, the right call is for Obama to cut our losses in Afghanistan and get out of dodge. Public support for the war has dropped dramactically as casualties increase and timetable drags on with no clear end in sight. The analysts are correct in saying that Pakistan, with it's internal discord, current civil war with Al-Quaeda, and unsecured nuclear material is the real threat to American security. I think that these problems should be addressed as well. However the moral decision is to stay the course and to help secure Afghanistan for its people. Otherwise chaos will reign and the status quo of fear and death every moment will continue.
Can you imagine living like that? It is easy for Americans to ignore the plight of others because we have it so good here. What if your car was blown up by terrorists while you were on the way to Macy's for that Saturday morning sale? What if your child picked up a landmine and never came home from playing outside? What if your wife or girlfriend was attacked by misogynist nut jobs who use an extremist interpretation of religion to declare that their place is at home, covered from head to toe and basically the slave of all their male relatives? How would we respond to such atrocities? How does one live in such a place.
More than likely your response is the same as mine, a blank stare. Because we as Americans simply can'te relate to this kind of suffering. We have no reference to or experience with sucha level of violence and loss. However the Afghani people do. This has been their existence for as long as the war has been going on. And we sit here and complain about the cost of gas and rising unemployment and bicker about healthcare while everyday Afghans leave their house wondering if they will ever see their loved ones again. America has a chance to do something about all of this. Our generals believe that we can win this war once and for all. We must increase troop levels in Afghanistan, not for our security, but for the security of the Afghani people.
America will find that we reap what we sow. If we leave Afghanistan to its fate again untold numbers of innocents will die when the Taliban return to power. Any who collaborated with America in forming their current government will die. All of the local leaders who have denounced the Taliban will die. Any and all who have spoken out and stood up for their rights as indivduals and as a fledgling nation will be silenced. And their blood will be on our hands. America has a wonderful opportunity here. If self serving interests and ideology are all that would motivate America to stay then consider this. Staying in Afghanistan would send the message to our enemies and allies alike that we are willing to fight for the right thing. All of the propoganda of peole like Osama Bin Laden who say that America isn't interested in fighting for Muslims would be void. We are fighting to protect Afghans from the handful of crazies that wish to impose the harshest from of Shariah or Islamic law upon their country. Such stringent punishments are a perversion of the religion of islam. That is why so many people have come out in opposition to this oppression.
We now stand at a crossroads, once a decison is made there can be no turning back.
Will America stand for morality and freedom, or will we go as home as cowards with our tail between our legs like in the 1980's? Only time will tell. I pray that Obama makes the right decision.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
The Party of No
I hate it when I am right about things going badly in America. It honestly gives me no satisfaction whatsoever. I would much rather be wrong and swallow my pride and look like an idiot while watching our country progress in a positive direction than sit back with the smug satisfaction of knowing that I called it all along. Just two days ago I posted an article about the lack of bipartanship in this country. More specifically I wrote in disgust about politicians and pundits on both sides who use political gamesmanship and mudslinging to divide this country to further their own selfish interests. Less than 24 hours after that post Republicans embarrassed themselves during a presidential address of congress concerning healthcare as I and the rest of the nation watched it live. At least I can say I told you so...
Wednesday night, President Obama was addressing a joint session of Congress on the issue of healthcare. He was addressing several myths that I have highlighted on the blog for weeks now such as the rumor about "death panels". Obama had just stated that the healthcare bill would not entitle illegal immigrants to healthcare coverage, which it wouldn't, when Republican Rep. Joe Wilson screamed "lie, You lie!" from his seat. To put this in perspective, this was not just a simple outburst that needed to be reprimanded. NO president in the history of this country has ever been shouted down by an opponent at a joint session of congress. It simply has never happened in the 300 some years that this country has been in existence. What's worse is that this was not the only incident of the night. Republicans laughed when Obama said their were still minor details to be worked out before the bill was passed. Another man, a congressman mind you, carried a homemade sign around his neck that read "what bill". At other points in his speech, Obama was booed by Republicans, like when he was refuting their hateful and incredibly stupid false myths about the health care bill. Republicans were mostly silent during Obama's rousing calls for bipartisan support. Even when the president conceded that he was wiling to compromise on certain issued they didn't budge an inch. But it was quiter than OSU fans during the Florida game when Obama rightfully blasted Palin, a supposedly responsible politician, for spreading lies like the death panel rumor in a conscious and politically motivated attempt to kill reform at all costs. Now you tell me which party the big insurance companies have in their pocket!
Here is the news story here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/politics3199018;_ylt=AnMTJYT.b43gWYhzbrybHIms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJ0dWxyM2Y0BGFzc2V0A2NxLzIwMDkwOTEwL3BvbGl0aWNzMzE5OTAxOARjcG9zAzIEcG9zAzgEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA2xhd21ha2Vyc2Nvbg--
After Wilson's outburst, by far the worst of the night, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot him a look that would give ice chills. Joe Biden, the Vice President, and Michelle Obama both shook their head in disbelief. Again I don't think the gravity of this idiot's actions is getting through. No president has ever been subjected to this level of blatant disrespect before by his own people! At least it was a foreigner that threw shoes at President Bush and not a fellow American. After the speech was over Rahm Emmanuel, Obama's chief of staff, approached Republican leaders in Congress and demanded that Wilson apologized. That is the nice and censured version, I think (and hope) that Rahm wasnt so nice during the whole exchange.
Even veteran political commentators were stunned by Wilson's outburst. It is simply something that is unheard of in American history. NBC's Chuck Todd and MSNBC's Joe Scarborough were horrified at the level of disrespect shown to the president. Now to the Republicans credit, some like Senator McCain from Arizona, have called on their colleague to apologize for his actions. Wilson did later issue a statement apologizing for his lack of decorum and attributed his unacceptable behavior to an "uncontrollable rush of emotion". Nice to know that the people we elect to Congress have the composure and temprament of a three year old child. I also wonder if the man realizes that the point that he accused Obama of lying about is in fact the truth and that his right-wing buddies are feeding him nothing but lies and propaganda? It also begs the question, did this guy read the bill in the first place? Maybe if he had he wouldnt have made a fool of himself on national tv. Oh and then there are others like Republican strategist and former Bush advisor Karl Rove who thought the whole incident was hilarious. http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/09/obama-joint-address/
So where do we stand now? I'm not making such a fuss about the actions of this moron from South Carolina for no reason. He represents a symptom of a problem, and not the problem itself. The problem is stubborness. The Republican party as a whole has decided upon the strategy of "no". It is their answer to everything that Obama does, even his very presidency itself, (birthers anyone?). Just 24 hours ago I wrote about partisanship and how it can tear a country apart. It is now happening before our very eyes. Congress is deadlocked because neither side will compromise. The general public is polarized to one side or the other and unwilling to give ground or worse, they are disillusioned with Washington in general and don't think that any of our problems are ever going to be solved. This is not the direction that America need to go in. There are currently millions of uninsured Americans in this country. As Obama said last night, we are the ONLY advanced Democratic nation in the world that has such a problem with its healthcare system. It is a moral imperative that we cover our citizens to the best of our ability as a nation without running up the deficit to untameable heights. These are Obama's words, not mine, but I fully agree with him.
24 hours ago I warned that these stupid political games would have dire consequences for our nation. 12 hours ago another Republican made a fool of himself on national tv and insulted the man I voted for to lead this supposed democracy. The people need reform. The people will have reform. 24 hours ago I stood for bipartisanship. In theory I always will because I believe that compromise and moderation often yield the best policy initiatives. But it is clear that the Republican part does not want to compromise. 24 hours ago I was against the use of the reconciliation process. Now I say this is the last call. Any that want to come to the table and offer their suggestion on both sides are welcome. But like Obama said last night, the time for games has passed. We need health care reform and we need it now, no matter how the legislation has to be passed. Just remember that if in 2010 or 2012 the Republicans try to say that the Democrats went it alone and ignored their input this is a lie. The Republicans are the negative ones. They are the party of no. And if they want to ever be elected to office again I suggest they start being useful. Otherwise they can reap the fruits of their labor and enjoy many more years of not being in power.
Wednesday night, President Obama was addressing a joint session of Congress on the issue of healthcare. He was addressing several myths that I have highlighted on the blog for weeks now such as the rumor about "death panels". Obama had just stated that the healthcare bill would not entitle illegal immigrants to healthcare coverage, which it wouldn't, when Republican Rep. Joe Wilson screamed "lie, You lie!" from his seat. To put this in perspective, this was not just a simple outburst that needed to be reprimanded. NO president in the history of this country has ever been shouted down by an opponent at a joint session of congress. It simply has never happened in the 300 some years that this country has been in existence. What's worse is that this was not the only incident of the night. Republicans laughed when Obama said their were still minor details to be worked out before the bill was passed. Another man, a congressman mind you, carried a homemade sign around his neck that read "what bill". At other points in his speech, Obama was booed by Republicans, like when he was refuting their hateful and incredibly stupid false myths about the health care bill. Republicans were mostly silent during Obama's rousing calls for bipartisan support. Even when the president conceded that he was wiling to compromise on certain issued they didn't budge an inch. But it was quiter than OSU fans during the Florida game when Obama rightfully blasted Palin, a supposedly responsible politician, for spreading lies like the death panel rumor in a conscious and politically motivated attempt to kill reform at all costs. Now you tell me which party the big insurance companies have in their pocket!
Here is the news story here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/politics3199018;_ylt=AnMTJYT.b43gWYhzbrybHIms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJ0dWxyM2Y0BGFzc2V0A2NxLzIwMDkwOTEwL3BvbGl0aWNzMzE5OTAxOARjcG9zAzIEcG9zAzgEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA2xhd21ha2Vyc2Nvbg--
After Wilson's outburst, by far the worst of the night, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot him a look that would give ice chills. Joe Biden, the Vice President, and Michelle Obama both shook their head in disbelief. Again I don't think the gravity of this idiot's actions is getting through. No president has ever been subjected to this level of blatant disrespect before by his own people! At least it was a foreigner that threw shoes at President Bush and not a fellow American. After the speech was over Rahm Emmanuel, Obama's chief of staff, approached Republican leaders in Congress and demanded that Wilson apologized. That is the nice and censured version, I think (and hope) that Rahm wasnt so nice during the whole exchange.
Even veteran political commentators were stunned by Wilson's outburst. It is simply something that is unheard of in American history. NBC's Chuck Todd and MSNBC's Joe Scarborough were horrified at the level of disrespect shown to the president. Now to the Republicans credit, some like Senator McCain from Arizona, have called on their colleague to apologize for his actions. Wilson did later issue a statement apologizing for his lack of decorum and attributed his unacceptable behavior to an "uncontrollable rush of emotion". Nice to know that the people we elect to Congress have the composure and temprament of a three year old child. I also wonder if the man realizes that the point that he accused Obama of lying about is in fact the truth and that his right-wing buddies are feeding him nothing but lies and propaganda? It also begs the question, did this guy read the bill in the first place? Maybe if he had he wouldnt have made a fool of himself on national tv. Oh and then there are others like Republican strategist and former Bush advisor Karl Rove who thought the whole incident was hilarious. http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/09/obama-joint-address/
So where do we stand now? I'm not making such a fuss about the actions of this moron from South Carolina for no reason. He represents a symptom of a problem, and not the problem itself. The problem is stubborness. The Republican party as a whole has decided upon the strategy of "no". It is their answer to everything that Obama does, even his very presidency itself, (birthers anyone?). Just 24 hours ago I wrote about partisanship and how it can tear a country apart. It is now happening before our very eyes. Congress is deadlocked because neither side will compromise. The general public is polarized to one side or the other and unwilling to give ground or worse, they are disillusioned with Washington in general and don't think that any of our problems are ever going to be solved. This is not the direction that America need to go in. There are currently millions of uninsured Americans in this country. As Obama said last night, we are the ONLY advanced Democratic nation in the world that has such a problem with its healthcare system. It is a moral imperative that we cover our citizens to the best of our ability as a nation without running up the deficit to untameable heights. These are Obama's words, not mine, but I fully agree with him.
24 hours ago I warned that these stupid political games would have dire consequences for our nation. 12 hours ago another Republican made a fool of himself on national tv and insulted the man I voted for to lead this supposed democracy. The people need reform. The people will have reform. 24 hours ago I stood for bipartisanship. In theory I always will because I believe that compromise and moderation often yield the best policy initiatives. But it is clear that the Republican part does not want to compromise. 24 hours ago I was against the use of the reconciliation process. Now I say this is the last call. Any that want to come to the table and offer their suggestion on both sides are welcome. But like Obama said last night, the time for games has passed. We need health care reform and we need it now, no matter how the legislation has to be passed. Just remember that if in 2010 or 2012 the Republicans try to say that the Democrats went it alone and ignored their input this is a lie. The Republicans are the negative ones. They are the party of no. And if they want to ever be elected to office again I suggest they start being useful. Otherwise they can reap the fruits of their labor and enjoy many more years of not being in power.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
The Culture Wars: Bringing America Back Together

This will be my first post that is not directly tied to one news story or idea. For about a year now I have blogged about politics and society in America and what the right course of action should be, at least in my opinion. At the end of my freshman year I added political science as a second major because I wanted to be informed about how decisions are made in this country. After all, knowledge is power.
I started watching the news and reading blogs from all over the political spectrum. I give time and consideration to all views, even ones that don't align with my own. I consider myself a political moderate and hate political gamesmanship and party politics above all else. For every post I have critisizing the Republicans I have an equal amount to say about the poor choices of the Democrats.
Many forces are coming together that I fear are unseen by the vast majority of Americans. We live in a supposedly post-racial America, yet ever since the historic election of President Obama it seems like race has been the only thing on the mind's of many politicians. Race baiting on both sides is not bringing America back together, but is rather driving it apart. While name calling and mudslinging have been a part of American politics for centuries now, it seems to me that current efforts on both sides are going above and beyond what is necessary to make the point.
This isn't some high horse moral argument about the need for honesty and civility in politics even though it very well could and should be. I see no reason why grown men and women can't sit down and talk out their differences like adults instead of name calling and lying like preschool children. Rather I am concerned for the common American who turns on their computer or television or flips a page in the newspaper and blindly accepts everything that politicians and political pundits are telling them. While there are many factors like socio-econmic status, family heritage, race, age, marital status, and others that can impact a person's party identification, an important part of that identification is tied to issue voting and image. In otherwards, the information that the average American recieves goes a long way towards determining their party affiliation. More important than mere party politics, this information is shaping and reinforcing thw world views that Americans have, how they see themselves, their fellow Americans, and everyone else in the world.
Don't believe me when I say that political polarization in this country is real? Just look at news headlines for the last few months. The tea parties protesting taxatation during the 4th of July, "birthers" who question the legitimacy of the Obama presidency because they subscribe to a stupid fairy tell that he wasn't actually born in Hawaii, "deathers" like Sarah Palin who wrongfully insist that the end of life counseling in Obama's healthcare plan is actually a mass socialist plot to redistribute healthcare benefits to the young and to kill your grandparents off early, people who bring loaded assault rifles to town hall meetings where the president is supposed to be speaking, Democrats who insist that they want a bipartisan solution to healthcare and then run around talking about reconciliation or the ability of the senate to pass important legislation with less than the normal majority of votes.
When will America learn that these political games get us nowhere? Was the hatred and angst that Glenn Beck stirred up last week during his smear campaign against green czar Van Jones worth it? Was it worth it to call Barack Obama a closet racist and lose dozens of sponsors, Beck? The sad answeer is yes. In America such divisive and repulsive behavior by supposedly responsible politicans and pundits is rewarded with results. Van Jones resigned from his post following the effective smear campaign and while Beck's advertiser list is a little thin his number of viewers and ratings are now at an all time high!
I said earlier that I follow blogs and news stories online. I do this not so much for the information itself but to see people's reaction to what is being talked about. Obviously going to a liberal site like huffingtonpost will give me right wing bashers and vice-versa. So sometimes I visit moderate news sites where the comments are anything but. For instance, check out the comments your fellow Americans left in reaction to this story about Glenn Beck, http://washingtonindependent.com/57912/glenn-becks-next-target-cass-sunstein.
If you scroll all the way down to the bottom you can find lovely little jewels of bi-partisanship and togetherness like this:
"Glenn Beck is a race-baiting, dry-drunk opportunist who will never pass up the chance to enrich himself while serving his corporate masters. He is a demagogue of the basest and most cynical stripe"
"Sweetie, America IS a sad little place. The Republicans made it that way a few years ago. I stopped watching your news a few months ago. Every person on your networks and cable seems to be a rabid republican with no sense of humour. Your country has been turned into a 'red neck' backwoods. The world has become bored with you people. You cannot even stand up for your own President. Americans are disgusting."
"IT'S AMERICA you dumb bastard......if you don't like it leave. Spell it correctly you commie piece of crap!!!! I guess turn-a-bout is fair play right. Obama had a hidden agenda and it is slowly being exposed. Bush attacks were unfounded.
Yours truly in Afghanistan"
"Don't call me a commie. I have that right only to determine what political group I belong with. I don't criticize you for being a right wing neo con christofascist. What is the minimum security clearance?"
But wait, here is my absolute favorite one of the whole bunch.
"Left wing women need to use there mouth and thoughts for sexual pleasure only, due to the fact they are a bunch of idiots when it comes to real issues, left wing whatever? that call themselves men who in fact are cowards! need to stay home and bake cookies and clean house, let the real men due your women so that they can find out what real pleasure is all about, doing it with a real man, this would keep them out of plolitics, and in the bedroom... OK so bring it on after all I just threw a banana in the monkey pit so come on lets hear it??? after all it will be nothing more then a knee jerk reaction from cowards and pleasure dolls hearing the truth! God Bless Glenn Beck! keep up the good work in exposing the rats nest!!!!! keep the left on nut drive"
So to recap, no facts, no logic, all name calling and offensive, bigoted comments from people who fancy themselves arm chair politicians. Apparently all liberals are godless wimps and socialist commie nutjobs and all republicans are racist, redneck, uneducated drooling morons who cling to guns and God. Is this what America is becoming? These people have the right to vote in this country. They have the right to publish such hateful and vile statements that serve no purpose except to inflame tensions between the two sides. I see no truth here because there are NO FACTS! Not one person brought up facts or a reasoned argument. Where is the logic? It is all emotion that is misplaced into attempts at villifying the supposed enemy. Oh and my absolute favorite, "Left wing women need to use there mouth and thoughts for sexual pleasure only, due to the fact they are a bunch of idiots when it comes to real issues." Are you kidding me?! Who died and put women's rights back two hundred years? This poster has the nerve to say something as blatantly sexist and offensive as offensive gets and then two sentences later is invoking the name of God to support his side of the debate. Hypocrisy at is absolute worst. I'm pretty sure that God wouldn't want you debasing his children like that. Oh and the last time I checked a man's political leanings have nothing at all to do with their ability or lack of ability to please a woman in bed as that same ignorant comment so asserted (also making me lament over this misguided fool's concept of real manhood but I digress).
This is where we stand America. These are the people that goble up partisan politics like there is no tomorrow. These are the people that continue to make it possible for the Glenn Beck's and Rush Limbaugh's of the world to make a living spewing their messages of hate and intolerance across the airwaves. It is one thing to reason and to defend your position with facts and numbers and statistics. It is another thing entirely to make baseless claims that fan the already rising flames of fear and intolerance in this great nation. No matter what side you support, if you see or hear mudslinging, race-baiting or any other attempt to divide our country for ones own personal or political gain then put a stop to it. The only way to confront lies is with the truth.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
The Heart of the Republican Party

I am a political moderate. I see myself as conservative on things such as family values yet liberal on foreign relations issues and things like health care and social security. As an educated man, I know the importance of balance and reason. Often times no one side is totally right on a particular issue. The best solutions are usually some sort of compromise.
Politics is all about selling an image. Politicians are well aware of this fact. That is why all of their double speak and long rhetorical answers that dont really give up any useful information are such a part of the profession. Politicians know, especially in the age of mass media and the internet, that one slip of the tongue can cost them their entire career. Some people like Bill Clinton are lucky enough to recover and continue to prosper. Other's like Howard Dean in the 2004 Democratic primaries didnt even have to SAY anything to crush their hopes at elected office. His strange and inexplicable shrill yell during a campaign rally convinced the general public that he was a little loose in the head and not fit to run for president.
I would like to think that America is capable of electing smart people to public office. Serving the public, when done right, is one of the most fulfilling and important careers that a person can have. So why do supposed smart people do and say stupid things? And I'm not talking about off the cuff remarks that are maybe questionable. Forget all the name calling and political spins and hearsay, when a politician says something so outrageous and so blatantly offensive as to call into question their ability to effectively perform their job, then they should be held responsible.
U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins, a Republican from Kansas, was talking at a forum in her home state when she made the comment that Republicans were looking for a "great white hope" as an answer to Obama's popularity and his policy proposals. Really? Why can't the Republican answer be Bobby Jindal, the popular and well spoken minority governor of Louisianna? Or how about Michael Steele, the new chairman of the Republican national party? Or maybe Michelle Malkin, a right wing leaning blogger and author whose column is one of the most widely read blogs in the country, (and is also very attractive I might add). But no, according to this bigot of a representative from Kansas, the Republican party must continue its long history of nominating old white protestant males for the highest office in the land.
There are two things that make this whole situation so revolting. The first is that she is certainly not the only one in the Republican party who thinks along racial lines. The whole ruckus over Sotomayor and the wise latina crap was unbelievable. If you didn't hear about all that then see my other posts. No one in the Republican party is thinking about using minorities as anything more than a sideshow, clowns who can keep the public's attention long enough for them to find their next White boy golden child who will save America for the real Americans, white people. Now I just said previously that I believe in moderation and that mudslinging and name calling are really not productive ways to help our country to grow and become better. But her comment can only be seen as racist. It is a comment that someone who has a superior social position thanks to the color of their skin would say because the status quo is being challenged. Yes America has a black president and its about time too!
More importantly, this comment will only further divide this country. Right now with all of the ruckus over healthcare reform and two ongoing wars the last thing our country needs is to be distracted by this crap. The best part is that Obama doesn't act like a he is "the Black president" Sure he plays basketball on the weekends and has a beautiful and intelligent Black wife that he goes on dates with, but its not like he is in the hood taking complaints from everyday folk and then going back to Washington to fight for the rights of minorities while forsaking all his other constituents. Obama is everyone's president. He was elected with the help of white voters in this country! Is everyone who opposes Obama racist? Absolutely not. Is every Republican a white supremacist? Nope. But when you have a party with people like Glenn Beck who make a completely unfounded an equally stupid claim that Obama has a deep seated hatred for white people or people that bring loaded assault rifles to rallys where the president is speaking or congressmen that throw away all decorum an common sense and insist on parading out yet another ancient white guy to run this country, it starts to make me wonder about the future of the Republican party.
They say that by 2040 this country will be predominately people of color and that whites will be the official minority. Maybe then the Republican party will support government initiatives like social security and a public option for healthcare reform. As long as the new minority benefits!
All of the political science literature that I have read to date has suggested that America's two party system will never change thanks to the political structure of the nation and other factors. I love watching the cable news networks like MSNBC and Fox News because all of the hosts make wild predicitons and crazy claims about their opponents in an attempt to drive up ratings. I do not subscribe to propaganda or sensationalist journalism. However here is my own crazy claim that common sense and the facts actually support. If the Republican party continues to pursue divisive racial politics in an era when the rest of the country is trying to move on then of of two things will happen. Either the smart Republicans will distance themselves from the looney ones and we will have a three party system with a major political realignment, or the Republican party will cease to exist alltogether as an effective political force. Fortunately in America the people with common sense outnumber idiots like Glenn Beck and Representative Jenkins. Our democaracy will flourish, unlike the careers of the foolish.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Civil Rights in Iraq

Everyone hopefully agrees that any kind of genocide or ethnic cleansing of social undesirables is completely unacceptable. Yet while Americans fight in our own country over proposition 8 and gay marriage and what rights gay couples should have, Gay Iraquis are involved in a struggle for the most basic human right, the right to life.
The media will censor what no one wants to talk about. Those almighty keepers of the pen, the watchdogs of the world are afraid to talk about this. Why? Because for some reason no one wants to own up to what is happening. This is headline news, worthy of coverage on all the networks and local newschannels, front page material for the New York Times and Washington Post. So why is it not there? Why did I have to find it in as a secluded back linked story on Yahoo's news page, buried under tons of other stories that are not nearly as impactful? Even worse, I follow events like this and this is the first time I have ever heard about it, EVER. But apparently his secret war on gays has been going on in Iraq for years. Don't believe me, read for yourself,
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090817/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq_gay_killings
Seventy years after World War 2 and the defeat of the Nazis, the world still hasnt learned that genocide is wrong. Whats worse is that seventy years later, America is still making excuses for why we can't intervene, citing this as an internal matter for the Iraquis to handle. If we keep allowing the authorities to handle things in this manner then maybe Perez Hilton will finally have something else to talk about other then red carpet fashion. There are no long winded discourses or discussions or debates to have about this. The Human Rights Watch has found irrefutable evidence that Gays in Iraq are being targeted for torture and murder by their fellow citizens. The current American backed regime is not doing nearly enough to stop this. As the article said, these murders are seldom if ever found responsible for their crimes. These so called honor killings are the same excuse that men use to kill their wives who have alleged affairs or who dare to speak out against the status quo. This harsh and extreme form of Islamic rule of law is exactly what we were fighting to overthrow, yet in reality it hasn't gone anywhere. What message does it send to the world when we lecture Russia and China and Israel about Human rights while we order our troops out of Iraqi population centers while a quiet social genocide is taking place?
I've said it many times before that America is often a great nation in terms of ideals but not necessarily of practice. We spew all this rhetoric about how we stand for justice and equality and democracy and yet we stand by and let evil like this happen. The line we didn't know cant be used anymore. Human Rights Watch has exposed this conspiracy for what it really is. Besides we tried that lame excuse with the Holocaust, claiming we didnt know what was going on then too. We used that line up until 1944 even though everyone knew about Mein Kampf and intelligence reports from inside occupied Europe from as early as 1939. Barack Obama can and should lose all crediblity if he doesnt see this through to a positive conclusion for all of the Iraqi people. Politically it would be a huge mistake to order US troops back into Iraqi cities as it would upset Iraqi law makers and would brake the withdrawal time table we fought so hard to have implemented. Obama would surely lose votes at home and support abroad with such a policy decision. But doing the right thing is seldom the most expedient or easy choice. If we don't act now while these killings are being done with American forces still in the country, what will happen to these people when our military leaves? America can not claim a moral mandate to uphold justice and then not act on it when the time is right.
A Nation of Forgiveness?
America prides itself for being a place of redemption. Everyone deserves a second chance, at least as long as you are not a pro football star by the name of Michael Vick.
I love how America works. We allow the media and special interest groups to determine what issues are salient in are everyday lives. We allow other people to decide what is acceptable and what is immoral and then follow blindly without question or complaint. Allow me to explain what I mean.
Let me begin by saying that what Michael Vick did to those poor dogs was wrong and inexcusable. There is no way around that fact. However he has paid his debt to society, spent the time in jail, over a year and half in fact. He has lost almost 130 Million dollars and had to file for bankruptcy, not to mention the damage done to his career and reputation by all of the negative publicity. Michael Vick has indeed suffered for his crimes.
Now Michael has a chance at redemption. His friend and fellow NFL quarterback Donovan Mcnabb became an advocate on his behalf and got Vick a two year deal with the Eagles. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has partially reinstated Vick into the league, allowing him to begin to peice his life back together.
In a moving interview with 60 Minutes, Vick described his remorse over the whole ordeal. He talked about the hurt and pain from his bad decisions and the realization that his actions had consequences that were very serious. Vick said during the interview that he cried many nights in jail and was very sorry for all the crimes he had committed. He has since partnered with the humane society and has gone on several speaking tours to talk to young kids about the evils of animal cruelty and dog fighting.
Unfortunately this is not enough for some people. There was a woman on Larry King Live last night who would not stop talking about the fact that Vick had committed a horrible crime. As a PETA representative, I understand where she was coming from but her attitude and mindset towards the matter were simply appalling. Everyone else on the show kept asking her whether Vick deserved forgiveness and a second chance. Everyone agreed that what he did was horrible but most thought that the deal with the Eagles was a positive situation. However the Peta rep dodged all questions about the need for a second chance and simply repeated over and over that "the dogs he killed didn't get a second chance".
She is not alone in this opinion. Several Eagles fans have threatened to boycott games because the franchise signed this pariah onto their team. Everyone is focused on the Vick drama and no one is worried about the real problem with the NFL and with the American legal framework and with society in general which is unfair penalties for disparate crimes. No one is talking about the fact that another NFL star, Donte Stallworth, who killed a person and not animals, not only will spend less time in jail than Michael Vick, but is having less negative coverage in the media. This makes no sense, How can one spend more time in jail for killing dogs than for killing a human being?
Its time to stop treating Michael Vick like the dogs that he fought and killed. The parallels are striking. Michael Vick trained these dogs to fight and to entertain and make a profit. But as soon as they were no longer useful they were terminated and cast out, undesirables that no one wanted to deal with anymore. Michael Vick plays football games in an arena that involves grown men fighting to control a pig skin crafted into the shape of the ball. Every Sunday stadiums fill to watch this game, millions of dollars are made and people are entertained by the likes of Vick. But as soon as he becomes undesirable or unable to perform he is thrown to the wolves. Some say that this is just business practices at work and to some extent I agree. After all no franchise wants to keep a player that will bring down their team either performance-wise or in the eyes of the fans. But it wasnt just the Falcons that wrote Vick off. It was a large portion of Americans who decided that this entertainer wasn't worth rehabilitation or a second chance.
What's funny is that all of these football fans who are crying about Philadelphia signing Vick will forget all about when Sportscenter shows Mcnabb throwing Vick a touchdown pass out of the new wildcat formation. After Vick has proved that he is still an incredible athlete capable of making big plays and drawing large crowds despite being out of comission for two years, all will be forgiven. That is wonderful for Vick, but what does this say about American society? Michael Vick deserves a second chance, not because of his incredible talent, but because everyone makes mistakes and everyone deserves a second chance. The guy that Donte Stallworth killed while driving under the influence didn't get a second chance. If Stallworth is getting a second chance, then Vick definitely deserves one, everyone needs to lighten up and stop going on these pointless witch hunts. The man said he was sorry, lets save our righteous anger for something a little more important than this.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
A World Gone Crazy

A lot has happened since my last post. I took some time off to do some serious soul searching and self reflection. It seems as if in the last two months the entire political reality of our nation has finally lost all semblance of coherence and effectiveness. So many problems, and so little time to bring common sense to the table.
The first issue I will address is the whole so-called "birther movement". There are still idiots on the far right who insist that the Obama administration is illegitimate because Obama himself is supposedly not a US citizen. Everyone knows that in order to be President one of the requirements is that the prospective candidate be a natural born citizen. This nonsense first came up during the campaign for presidency in 2008. The Obama camp did a wonderful job of not stooping to the mudslinging tactics of their adversaries. Instead they produced official government documents from the state of Hawaii that proved that Obama was a natural born US citizen. Unfortunately this official documentation is not enough for some people. A few days ago MSNBC showed a clip from a journalist from the Huffington Post who walked around Capitol Hill interviewing Republican congressmen about the scandal. To my surprise, several of them had the gall to continue this ignorant charade. Responses ranged from "I would still like to see more proof" to "The matter is still under investigation". Only one person had the courage to do the right thing, to tell the truth instead of playing party politics. One Representative looked straight into the camera and said that "documentation has been provided. I believe President Obama was born where he said he was born". Now in the overall political landscape such a scandal is really unimportant. I started out with this topic only to point out the fact that grown men and women are actually still spending time debating a subject that never should have been brought up in the first place. If the Republicans really want to make a positive showing to the American people, then offer up suggestions on health care reform that are also money savvy so that the American people are taken care of without tanking the rest of our ailing economy. Instead of dealing with real issues, the House actually spent time today drafting and voting on a resolution dealing with the birthplace of our first Black president. Talk about wasting time and energy. They wonder why no one like politicians. Its because they are spending time playing games while the common Americans suffer from the credit crisis and a messed up health care system.
In other news, a prominent Black professor at Harvard was recently arrested for breaking into his own home. The controversy continues about whether or not the incident involved racism or racial profiling. It turns out that the professor was locked out of his home, he forced entry into the front door and while in the process was observed by some of the neighbors. They thought the place was being robbed and called the cops. A white officer showed up and the professor got indignant, asking if he was being harrassed because he was a black man. The exchange went on for awhile and ultimately the professor was arrested for disorderly conduct. There are all kinds of problems with this scenario. The officer should have had the common sense to realize it was the man's home, especially after he provided identification information. Also the verbal exchange, while unnecessary on the professor's part, didn't warrant an arrest. A black officer was also present while all of this was taking place and the 911 caller never assumed that the culprit was black. This doesn't appear to be a case of racial profiling like everyone keeps calling it, even though this evil is still very real and relevant in a supposedly post-racial America. However I would like to focus on the political pundits response to comments that Barack Obama made after the incident occurred. The president made an off the cuff remark that the arrest was "stupid". Thats it. Thats all he said. And the political world is up in a firestorm, once again over nothing. All week Fox News has had people on TV talking about how Barack had "undone all of the wonderful progress towards healing the racial tensions in America." Why because he called a stupid act what it was, stupid? Putting myself in the professor's shoes, I would be more than a little annoyed if ANYBODY showed up to my doorstep uninvited demanding that I show identification and treating me like I was a possible suspect. Color would have nothing to do with it. Much like the professor I would have complied with the police and produced the necessary information. So what if my language during the entire exchange is less than apropriate? Since when is that ever grounds for an arrest? There is no law that says I can't swear at an officer that is treating me like a criminal in MY OWN HOUSE. It is amazing how a simple understanding can be blown so out of proportion. What started out as a bad day for a professor and a well-intentioned deed by a neighbor suddenly took teh whole country back to the days before Martin Luther King's dream, at least thats what the media wants us to believe.
But don't worry, it gets a whole lot better. Because not only is Barack Obama not a citizen, and not only is he a racist for insulting all White cops in America for something that never happened and something he never said they did, but apparently our president is also a racist because he it being tough on Israel. That's right, according to the current administration, it is time for Israel to treat the Palestinians like human beings. Wow imagine that! People actually treating their neighbors like people and not animals or some plague or virus that needs to be wiped off the face of the Earth. Just imagine if someone would have had the guts to get tough with Hitler and demand that he stop the the Holocaust... before it actually happened. A novel idea that the country that claims to be the champion defender of equality, democracy and justice would stand up for the rights of people who have been silenced. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has repeatedly called on all Israeli settlements in current Palestinian lands to be dismantled. The Israeli government basically laughed in our face and continued building, claiming natural growth as some kind of justification for stealing land and resources that are not theirs. This behavior is just as evil as America wiping out the native indian population in the name of "Manifest Destiny" of Hitler annexing the Sudetenland to "unite all German speaking peoples. They ignore our demands for equality and civil rights, yet they demand our protection from Iran and the threat of nuclear weapons. Nevermind the fact that America has mad sure that Israel is the dominant military and economic power in the region. Nevermind the fact that Israel has its own not so secret nuclear weapons program that we ever so nicely asked them to disband. Of course those demands went no where too. This is what I like to call a dysfunctional relationship. We do all the work and yet when we ask them to play by our rules, then suddenly we have overstepped our bounds. Its like the kid who brings all the toys out to the playground and then doesn't get to play with any because all the other kids took them and won't share. Or its like the crazy girlfriend who gets jealous whenever you talk to any girl no matter who it is but she can talk to her ex at anytime of the night. Israel has to learn to play by the rules. American power can no longer be used as a tool to help the strong oppress the weak. Notice I said nothing about Israel not protecting itself. I believe that a two state solution is the only viable solution for peace in the middle east. While Israel cries and whines about the rantings and ravings of madmen, it should take a close look at the hardliner they just chose to lead their own country. Ahmadinejad is a crazy man, but he is not the one pulling the strings. As I said in earlier posts, if Iran acquires the bomb it will be purely for defensive purposes only. I refuse to believe that they are stupid and suicidal enough to actually launch an attack on the most powerful country in the region. Some tough love is the best thing for Israel right now. Maybe if the US steps back and lets them feel the heat they will come to their senses. I have just summarized the president's position on the matter. None of it was Anti-Semitic in the slightest, however those are the words that are wonderful political pundits are now using.
In short, I'm back and I'm here to stay. Better than ever and ready to sort through the craziness that we call life, one stupid problem at a time.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
A Second Korean War

As if World War 2 weren't enough, the early 1950's saw the outbreak of hostilities on the Korean penninsula. The communist north invaded the south in hopes of unifying the country under one government. The United States and newly created United Nations responded and the Korean war got underway. After years of fighting with many casualties on both sides, an armistice was signed at the 38th parallel, almost exactly where the war started!
Recently, North Korea has been continuing to advance its nuclear weapons program. It detonated a small nuclear weapon and test fired short and long range ballistic missiles. The international community responded with anger and threats of sanctions, the North Koreans responded with threats of military force.
The North Koreans sight South Korean pledges to join Obama's initiative to search sea vessels suspected of carrying nuclear contraband as an informal declaration of war. The unstable North Korean government issued a warning that any attempt to stop ships bound for communist nation would be met by military force. South Korean and American troops are currently on high alert in response to the diplomatic threats.
A shooting war, should it develop, would likely be similar to deadly skirmishes thay ere fought between North and South as recently as 2003. If any fighting occurs, that should be the worst of it. But what if it's not. North Korea has a large standing conventional military and an invasion would cost many lives on both sides. There are currently 25,000 American troops stationed in South Korea, more than president Obama is sending to Afghanistan as part of the surge. There are an additional 50,000 AMerican troops in Japan. In the event of an invasion, civilian casualties would likely be very heavy. Ultimately, the North would be outgunned and would lose the war, amidst tragic loss of life. Kim Jong might be tempted to use whatever operational nuclear weapons his country has in order to stave off military defeat and political coup. North Korea knows they are outgunned, so what is with all the saber waving?
North Korea can't claim that nuclear weapons will make their country more secure becasue they are doing the exact opposite. This is the closest that we have come to another Korean war since the 1953 armistice. The only logical explanation is domestic politics. The communist party in North Korea needs something positive. The poverty in North Korea is simply unbelievable. The government is not capable of feeding its own citizens. They rely on aid from the UN and other charitable sources so that they don't stare to death. The real victims here are the civilians, who are trapped under an oppressive regime that doesn't really care whether any of them live or die. Rumor has it that Kim Jong is grooming his son to be his successor as head of the communist party. The only thing preventing an uprising of the general populace is fear of violent reprisals and a twisted since of national unity against American oppression that is spoon fed to the masses via the government-run media.
The ultimate goal of American foreign policy should be the protection of lives, of our soldiers, allies and the North Korean civilians. North Korea poses no signifigant military threat to America and the outbreak of a general war is unlikely as it would be comparable to them committing suicide. Diplomacy and patience are still the way to go, but harsher sanctions might be needed. If North Korea gives weapons technology and knowledge to terrorists then there is no telling what could happen. So far Obama is doing and saying all the right things to prevent this problem from turning into a disaster. Only time will tell just how crazy North Korea really is.
Forgiving Michael Vick

I never cared much for the NFL. I always was and still am an avid college football fan. But watching Michael Vick at the Falcons stirred something in me that the rest of the league simply couldn't copy. There was something about the way that this Black man led his team to victory, using a skill set that is highly unusual for a professional quarterback, that made him worth watching. Vick's athleticism is the stuff of legends. He may not have been the best passer in the league but no one could run like him. This dual-threat provided a spark to the Atlanta offense that maybe didn't always win games but it frustrated opposing defenses and made the sport that much more entertaining.
More importantly, I used the Falcons to murder all my friends every year in Madden tournaments. At this point I was still a kid, maybe around 14 or 15 years old. My love for Vick continued to grow, until he was arrested for dog fighting. By this time, I was older and understood more of race relations here in America. I understood that everyone associated Vick with Black men, something I was trying desperately to become. His stupidity in running a dog fighting ring out of one of his many homes really can't be put into words. I was angry, not because of what happened to him, but because of what I felt would happen to me.
I worried that this entire debacle would add more fuel to the notion that all Black men are savages, animals without any sense of feeling or control. After all participating in something as barbaric as dog fighting is simply inexcusable. The media had a field day covering the trial and Vick's so called "boy" ratted him out to the feds. I wondered subconsciously if anyone would look at me differnetly because this idiot messed up.
I refused to look at it from his point of view, ever. All I could think about was the fact that the Black community has lost another role model to his own stupidness. Now that I think about it I can safely say that Vick lost more from his mistakes than I did. His wealth, image, prestige, fans, friends, everything that the world says makes a man a man were taken from him. In the time that he's been in prison I have realized my hypocrisy in condemning him. After all I have done plenty of stupid things, I'm just not famous enough for everyone to know about it. I still can't help but wonder how a person that has everything could throw it all away for dogs. I know good Black men who are struggling to make ends meet that would love to have just a tiny fraction of Vick's former success and wealth. But in the end I have to recognize that we're all human and that everyone makes mistakes. It doesn't excuse what he did, but he's paid his debt to society and its time to move on. I wish him the best in whatever lies ahead, and who knows, maybe it Matt Ryan starts sucking maybe my beloved Falcons will get their original franchise quarterback back.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Victims and Perpetrators of Genocide

The year was 1945. Europe lay in ruins, shattered by six years of dvastating conflict. World War 2 was the most costly in terms of human lives and monetary damage in the course of human history. At the heart of the tragedy in Europe lay the holocaust, the brain child of the Nazi's final solution to the Jewish question. More than 6 million innocent people lay dead in concentration adn extermination camps across German-occupied Europe. The destruction was so horrible that Europe's Jewish population was nearly wiped out. The prosecutors at Nurmenburg had to come up with new legal terminology to decribe the seemingly endless depths of the evil Nazi atrocities. Thus the term "crimes against humanity" was born.
The remaining Jews in Europe wanted a safe place that they could call their own. The zionist movement was born and thousands of Jews from acoss the world flocked to the newly created state of Israel to find a frest start. America protected this new country and provided it with economic and military assistance until it became a regional superpower, crushing its surrounding Arab enemies in war after war until it was stronger than all its enemies combined. Once external threats had been subdued, Israel turned to domestic problems in its newly conquered territories. Palestinians were the majority in captured ares like Gaza and the West Bank. These areas were policed by the Israeli military with an iron fist. Israeli settlers invaded the area and established homes and cites in territory that was already the home of Arab Palestinians. This led to uprisings called the intifadas adn ultimately to terrorist organizations like the Palestinian Liberation Organization and Hamas that continue to threaten Israeli civilians and disrupt any hopes of establishing a lasting peace in the area.
The obvious answer is a two state solution. The Palestinians were there before the Israelis however neither side is going away. Allowing the Palestinians to govern themselves from a capital in East-Jerusalem is not only fair, but it would make things easier on Israel as well. The occupation and blockade of the Palistinain areas must end immediately. All checkpoints and fences must be taken down, the Palestinians are people, not animals that need to be locked up and controlled like dogs. It is basically then a live and let live situation. Israel stays out of Palestine and Palestine stays out of Israel. It's sort of like OSU and Michigan the week before the big football game. OSU fans in Ann Arbor keep a low profile while Michigan fans in Columbus exist under pain of death. We don't have to like each other, but we also don't fight. And despite all the trash talking and cheers when OSU inevitably wins, it all resets for the next year, with little to no violence occuring.
Its obvious that Israelis and Arabs don't really like each other. But that doesn't mean that justice can't still be served. However some hard-liners in the current Israeli administration are totally against a two state solution. Bibi Netanyahu, the current leader of the majority political party in Israel, has said repeatedly that he does not support a separate and independent Palestinian state. Under his plan the status quo would continue. Militants would keep making terrorist attacks on Jews, the Israeli military would continue to oppress Palestinians, hard line Islamic extremeist would contune to gain a propaganda victory by dispaying this as a broader effort by the Democratic west to launch a crusade on Islam, and there would be no peace in the Middle East.
However there is a second solution that is being seriously considered by some people in Israel. The Meir Kahane Solution calls for the expulsion of all Palestinians from the occupied territories. Not in a friendly way either. This view was first put forth by a late rabbi who lends his name to the proposal. Jews of all people should know the horrors of genocide. How could anyone in good conscience make such a recommendation and be serious about it? I am convinced that this stupid Rabbi has a seat right next to Hitler and Stalin in hell.
source:http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20090519/cm_uc_crpbux/op_3310027
So there really are three options for Israel. Genocide, status quo, or moral courage. Moral courage would suggest the obvious, that a two state solution is not only the right thing to do, but from a selfish point of view would be beneficial to Israel in the long run. The Obama administration has committed itself to brokering a lasting peace between the two sides. Israel is going to have to come to the table willing to make some concessions. Otherwise they no longer deserve the American and Nato support that has made them militarily superior to their Arab enemies. I will not accept my tax dollars being used to oppress civilians in an unfair political and ethnically charged battleground. Its time to either put up or shutup. Israel has one more chance to get it right, otherwise more innocents on both sides will die. There blood will be on Netanyahu's hands.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Religious Hypocrisy and Gay Marriage

For those of you who haven't been following the recent Miss America Pageant scandal, things are starting to get interesting. It all started when celebrity judge and gay rights blogger Perez Hilton asked Miss California a loaded question during the interview portion of the competition. "What are your views on gay marriage?" he asked. She replied, "well I think it's great that we live in a country where everyone is free to choose. But you know, no offense to anyone but I think that marriage should be between a man and a woman. That's how I was raised and that's what I believe."
The reaction was immediate. Some liberal gay rights supporters immediately denounced her as a bigot and other b words that aren't worth mentioning but you know what they are. Why? Because she didn't give the politically correct answer that Hilton and all the other judges were looking for. I'm sorry but any so called competiton where questions are asked and a honest answer isn't expected or wanted isn't worth the time of day in the first place. I mean what was Carrie supposed to do? She didn't ge the normal is world peace possible bs that pageants normally throw out there to contestants. Instead Hilton either knowingly or unknowingly made her the next battle cry of the culture wars that is tearing America apart at the seams. Conservatives in the audience applauded her response while liberals sat and fumed. As an aside, for Hilton and his cronies to decry her honest answer as her being a dumb bitch only furthers misogny and the cultural dismissal of women who are not submissive and subservient to current cultural norms. Hilton apologized the next day for his language only to later retract the apology and say that he considered calling her something even worse. Real classy Hilton, way to demonstrate your tolerance for other opinions. I hope you are not the poster child for the gay rights movement because if so you just set everyone back.
So Carrie became the runner up to some another woman wearing too much makeup because she was bold enough to speak her mind. I completely believe her when she said "no offense" People need to realize that gay marriage is a devisive issue that will take time for people to come to a consensus on. But Carrie's words, demeanor, and attitued are a far cry from hatred or intolerance. As a matter of fact, she shares the same religious beliefs that I do. As I said in an earlier post i just happen to support gay marriage because I believe that people have a right to self determination in such private matters, (and no, abortion does not fall under my definition of a private matter). I will never attempt to force my beliefs upon others and I am a full supporter of tolerance. However I applaud Carrie for her bravery in bringing honesty to pageant that is all fake and misogynistic anyway. The idea that women are only good for walking around in bikinis and and answering stupid scripted hypothetical questions is simply mind boggling.
Well that should have been the end of story but unfortunately things always take a turn for the worst. Soon after the pageant ended accusations came out that Carrie had recieved plastic surgery on her breasts. They turned out to be true but it is so common in America today that no one really cares. Then topless photos from modeling shoots that Carrie had recently done showed up on the web. Some people contended that these photos were a breach of her contract and that she should be stripped of the Miss California crown. But it gets much better. Instead of defending her right to the title or simply saying nothing at all, Carrie is actually using this completely unrelated forum to continue to talk about marriage! Carrie accused her critics of using this slander as an opportunity to silence her on the marriage issue. I concede that probably most of the reason why all of this is happening is because of her politically incorrect answer to Hilton's question. However my problem is with what she said to the reporter next, "From this day forward I promise I will use my naked breasts for good. I intend to fight back with the two greatest weapons I have: my naked boobies." SHe later went on so say that she would be both "tireless and topless" in her efforts to fight civil unions.
source:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-borowitz/miss-usa-vows-to-use-her_b_202163.html
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't she say "no offense" How did a simple and unexpected pageant question turn into yet another crusade against homosexuality? And better still, how is she planning on fighting immorality with immorality? That's like me tryign to fight a forest fire with gasoline, it makes no sense whatsoever. Now to be fair, I'm not saying that to speak out on moral issues of the conscience that one has to be perfect.The bible clearly states in Romans that ALL have sinned. I know that I'm no perfect yet I speak up when I feel things aren't right. Its the entire purpose of the blog you are crrently reading. Yet what Carrie is doing is different. She is actively sinning to combat another person's percieved sin, and smiling while doing it! This is wrong on many levels. It makes her a huge hypocrite.
For her to stand her and say that it's wrong for two people who love each other to be together yet ok for her to expose her God given private sexuality for public consumption is a double standard. If we accept the bible as truth then we have to accept all of it, not just the parts we like. Furthermore this once again reinforces the incredibly damaging and common notion that a woman's sole purpose is to sastify a man's sexual appetite.
Forget the moral aspect for a minute, from a common sense standpoint this approach has an approximate score of zero. Who is she trying to reach with these so called "weapons". The men that see this are going to exactly be paying attention to what she has to say. Their eyes and focus will naturally be on everything but her face. And the women won't care, heck they should all be ashamed. The only women that might be interested in such a sight probably hate Carrie's guts anyways for her views on gay marriage. When she answered the question and nothing more, everything was ok. But in a matter of weeks she has become the very bigot that Perez Hilton accused her of being in the first place. And the absolute best part is that America's supposed conscience is totally going along with all this. I have yet to hear one word of dissent from Republican Christians, people who act like they are the only ones in America who are going to heaven. Are they ok with this? I don't want this woman representing herself like this. It's demeaning and quite frankly it makes her look like an absolute moron. But more importantly I don't want her representing Christian's like this. It makes all of us look like idiots and morons too. I am not a moron.
Are Republicans so desparate to stem the tide of Gay marriage that they are willing to sell their souls to do it? I think we should all be more focused on the fact that America has one of the highest domestic abuse rates of any industrialized country in the world. We wag our finger at the Taliban for trhowing acid on women in schools and then we come home from work and beat the hell out of our women when they "get outta line". Hypocrisy. We spend all this time talking about how gay marriage is the end of the traditional family yet we encourage our males to be pimps and players and to dodge their fatherly duties after they have knocked up yet another female. We watch shows like Flavor of Love about a guy who already has kids with multiple women who he doesn't support, We watch him live in a house with supposedly "real" women and try to get married, knowing full well their relationship won't last more than a year. I personally want to disown Flavor and everybody like him. They make me ashamed to call myself a Black man. Yet we promote this as an image of ouselves through the mass media! We ignore drugs, pornogrhaphy, infidelity and everything else, just so we can worry about what Gay couples are doing. I say enough! End the hypocrisy now.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Republican Intolerance
Following Obama's victory in the 2008 presidential election, the Republican party claimed they were switching gears to "connect with a new electorate". Indeed the millenial generation of which I am a proud member not only voted overwhelmingly in support of Obama, but also shares characteristics with past generations who were heavily pro-democrat. According to surveys conduted by the Pew Research Center and several political scientists, Millenials are more likely to view the world as capable of being a good place, more likely to believe that we can make a difference. This is one reason why Obama's change slogan rang so clearly with young voters. We know that change is possible under the right leadership. On the issues, millenials are more likely to say they support health care reform and social security and welfare. Gay marriage also enjoys a narrow majority of support among young voters. Demographically speaking, the millenial generation is the most racially and ethnic diverse that this country has ever seen. Young people are now more likely than ever to be exposed to and educated about other cultures. Young Americans are even more likely to share several different cultures because of the increase in racially diverse couples.
All of this bodes well for the Democrats, who have long taken up the mantle for social justice and racial equality. The Democrats will forever be remembered as the party that catapulted a Black man to the oval office. The Republican party is now struggling to rebuild their image in the face of defeats in the last two major national elections. In an attempt to show off their racial diversity, they appointed Michael Steele, a Black man, as chairman of the Republican National Convention. However his attempts to merge hip hop and politics and to make the Republican party cool have been a dismal failure. Worse than his PR campaign fiasco was when Michael Steele made a comment that Rush Limbaugh, a conservative radio talk show host, was not the leader of the Republican party and then recanted and apologized a few days later on national television. It would have been funny to watch had it not been so sickeningly pathetic. Seeing Steele grovel to a heartless racist like Limbaugh really made my skin crawl. For those of you who haven't heard Limbaugh's incredibly inflammatory comments concerning racial minorities simply go to youtube and look them up. You'll be amazed at what you find.
After the Steele fiasco the Republican party turned to Louisianna governor Bobby Jindal as the smart new minority face of the party. However ever since his responce to the presidential state of the union address, the media has stopped caring about anything he has to say. Still insisting that they are not the party of no while throwing tea parties and drawing enough attention from homeland security to be labeled a potential domestic terrorist threat, right-wingers all across the nation look for a new sense of direction. Two recent events show a trend that I hope and pray is not the future of the Republican party, otherwise the Dems will be in power for a VERY long time.
The first offense to American decency comes in the form of political trickery played out by the Republican party in relation to the new hate crimes bill that is being sent through Congress. Representative Steven King proposed that the term sexual orientation exclude pedophiles, even though the bill already does this by defining sexual orientation as "consensual homosexuality or heterosexuality". This behavior is clearly legal, while pedophilism is not, EVER. So why would a Republican representative introduce an amendment proposing a clarification that has already been made? Why to later blame it all on Democrats of course! His amendment was not a good-hearted attempt to separate homosexuals from law breaking child molesters as that distinction had already been made. It was instead an attempt to tie the two together by forcing the Democrats to vote against his stupid amendment. They of course did, and what followed was lower than a child bully's playground antics. After the vote, Sean Hannity and other conservatives on the Fox News Network blasted Democrats for siding with pedophiles. Supposedly because Democrats showed some moral courage and voted against an amendment they knew to be corrupt they now somehow want to protect pedophiles. This twisted logic could only come from people who are messed up in the head. In the end, this is all a pathetic attempt to smear the Democrats and to prevent passage of the Hate crimes bill, a law that specifically defines hate crimes as being "motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim. Of course the Republican party doesn't want to protect minorities, the disabled or women.
source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20090507/cm_huffpost/198326
In keeping with the "lets build up or party by offending the general public and alienating potential voters" strategy, Joe the Plumber, the unofficial conservative hero during the 2008 presidential campaign, dropped this intellectual bombshell in an interview with a Christian publication "I would never let openly homosexual people anywhere near my children". Really? Why are you afraid that the gay gene is going to rub off on your kids and make them undesirable to your oppressive theocratic ideology? I love this comment, I really do because it allows us to examine the current firestorm behind gay marriage. As a Christian I believe what the Bible says,even the parts that I don't like. So if it says that homosexuality is wrong then it's wrong. But here is the difference between me and Joe the Plumber. I don't believe i should force my beliefs onto other people. Just because I believe something doesn't mean that everyone else does. This is where the idea of the separation between church and state comes into play. I am a full supporter of Gay marriage because I don't believe I can tell other people how to live their lives, especially when their decisions only affect themselves and cause no harm to them or anyone else. If gay people are allowed to marry then that IN NO WAY infringes upon my rights or my commitment to raise a family in the traditional manner the way that God intended. I also am not stupid enough to assert that Pedophilia and Gays are the same thing. The real reason that Joe doesn't want gays near his kids is because he harbors some irrational and completely idiotic fear that gay people want to rape, molest or in some other way harm his kids. This is the same kind of fear used in the South to justify violence, segregation and lynching for hundreds of years. They were doing it to protect their white women from supposedly dangerous Black men that wanted to harm them. Such irrational fears must be put to rest, forever. Similar arguments are being used to prevent happy and stable gay couples from adopting, while hetrosexual couples that abuse their kids are allowed to keep them. What kind of logic is that? Is a heterosexual couple that locks their kids in cages at night and beats them severly for the smallest of infractions really better than letting them live with a loving couple whose names just happen to be Jim and John or Sally and Sue?
source:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/04/joe-the-plumber-queer-mea_n_196116.html
The Republican party is scratching their heads about why they no longer have political power while they let idiots like Joe the Plumber, Stephen King, and Rush Limbaugh make a mockery of justice here in America. Newsflash neocons, the reason you're losing votes is because America is tired of your bigotry, racism and hatred. We've moved on so why haven't you? If the Republican party really wants to win again, stick to anti-abortion and fiscal responsibility and lose the war-mongering and intolerance. It will serve you well in the long run.
All of this bodes well for the Democrats, who have long taken up the mantle for social justice and racial equality. The Democrats will forever be remembered as the party that catapulted a Black man to the oval office. The Republican party is now struggling to rebuild their image in the face of defeats in the last two major national elections. In an attempt to show off their racial diversity, they appointed Michael Steele, a Black man, as chairman of the Republican National Convention. However his attempts to merge hip hop and politics and to make the Republican party cool have been a dismal failure. Worse than his PR campaign fiasco was when Michael Steele made a comment that Rush Limbaugh, a conservative radio talk show host, was not the leader of the Republican party and then recanted and apologized a few days later on national television. It would have been funny to watch had it not been so sickeningly pathetic. Seeing Steele grovel to a heartless racist like Limbaugh really made my skin crawl. For those of you who haven't heard Limbaugh's incredibly inflammatory comments concerning racial minorities simply go to youtube and look them up. You'll be amazed at what you find.
After the Steele fiasco the Republican party turned to Louisianna governor Bobby Jindal as the smart new minority face of the party. However ever since his responce to the presidential state of the union address, the media has stopped caring about anything he has to say. Still insisting that they are not the party of no while throwing tea parties and drawing enough attention from homeland security to be labeled a potential domestic terrorist threat, right-wingers all across the nation look for a new sense of direction. Two recent events show a trend that I hope and pray is not the future of the Republican party, otherwise the Dems will be in power for a VERY long time.
The first offense to American decency comes in the form of political trickery played out by the Republican party in relation to the new hate crimes bill that is being sent through Congress. Representative Steven King proposed that the term sexual orientation exclude pedophiles, even though the bill already does this by defining sexual orientation as "consensual homosexuality or heterosexuality". This behavior is clearly legal, while pedophilism is not, EVER. So why would a Republican representative introduce an amendment proposing a clarification that has already been made? Why to later blame it all on Democrats of course! His amendment was not a good-hearted attempt to separate homosexuals from law breaking child molesters as that distinction had already been made. It was instead an attempt to tie the two together by forcing the Democrats to vote against his stupid amendment. They of course did, and what followed was lower than a child bully's playground antics. After the vote, Sean Hannity and other conservatives on the Fox News Network blasted Democrats for siding with pedophiles. Supposedly because Democrats showed some moral courage and voted against an amendment they knew to be corrupt they now somehow want to protect pedophiles. This twisted logic could only come from people who are messed up in the head. In the end, this is all a pathetic attempt to smear the Democrats and to prevent passage of the Hate crimes bill, a law that specifically defines hate crimes as being "motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim. Of course the Republican party doesn't want to protect minorities, the disabled or women.
source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20090507/cm_huffpost/198326
In keeping with the "lets build up or party by offending the general public and alienating potential voters" strategy, Joe the Plumber, the unofficial conservative hero during the 2008 presidential campaign, dropped this intellectual bombshell in an interview with a Christian publication "I would never let openly homosexual people anywhere near my children". Really? Why are you afraid that the gay gene is going to rub off on your kids and make them undesirable to your oppressive theocratic ideology? I love this comment, I really do because it allows us to examine the current firestorm behind gay marriage. As a Christian I believe what the Bible says,even the parts that I don't like. So if it says that homosexuality is wrong then it's wrong. But here is the difference between me and Joe the Plumber. I don't believe i should force my beliefs onto other people. Just because I believe something doesn't mean that everyone else does. This is where the idea of the separation between church and state comes into play. I am a full supporter of Gay marriage because I don't believe I can tell other people how to live their lives, especially when their decisions only affect themselves and cause no harm to them or anyone else. If gay people are allowed to marry then that IN NO WAY infringes upon my rights or my commitment to raise a family in the traditional manner the way that God intended. I also am not stupid enough to assert that Pedophilia and Gays are the same thing. The real reason that Joe doesn't want gays near his kids is because he harbors some irrational and completely idiotic fear that gay people want to rape, molest or in some other way harm his kids. This is the same kind of fear used in the South to justify violence, segregation and lynching for hundreds of years. They were doing it to protect their white women from supposedly dangerous Black men that wanted to harm them. Such irrational fears must be put to rest, forever. Similar arguments are being used to prevent happy and stable gay couples from adopting, while hetrosexual couples that abuse their kids are allowed to keep them. What kind of logic is that? Is a heterosexual couple that locks their kids in cages at night and beats them severly for the smallest of infractions really better than letting them live with a loving couple whose names just happen to be Jim and John or Sally and Sue?
source:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/04/joe-the-plumber-queer-mea_n_196116.html
The Republican party is scratching their heads about why they no longer have political power while they let idiots like Joe the Plumber, Stephen King, and Rush Limbaugh make a mockery of justice here in America. Newsflash neocons, the reason you're losing votes is because America is tired of your bigotry, racism and hatred. We've moved on so why haven't you? If the Republican party really wants to win again, stick to anti-abortion and fiscal responsibility and lose the war-mongering and intolerance. It will serve you well in the long run.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)